Last post of the day, for those that may not be familiar with gravimetric fire assays. Very simple explanation.
http://www.actlabs.com/page.aspx?page=477&app=226&cat1=549&tp=12&lk=no&menu=64
IMO. The issues plaguing our share price (besides a crappy market) are related to ownership (Caren, etc.). I’ve seen the claims map but I guess I’m not smart enough to understand who owns what (today) …AND if shares of Auryn will be issued for various option agreements vs. hard cash. The acceptance of shares of Auryn would require reworking of the prior agreements. I’m hoping we get clarity on these questions for both MDMN and CDCH in the Auryn corporate update.
3 Likes
We’ve seen remarkable results before (although it’s been a while since we’ve seen a release with numbers like this). I see this sort of report as confirmation that the mountain does indeed hold what we all hope it does - and make no mistake, that’s fantastic. But neither does it change my perception of this investment nor does it elicit any actionable response. More powder for the cannon, I suppose.
That being said, I’m optimistic (and very slightly expectant) that we’ll see a few of our major roadblocks give way before the option period expires (ending the JJ conflict, releasing a solid post-option plan, shaking off the penny stench, etc). Until then, we’ll be doing what we’ve been doing - “buying cheap”.
Looking a little closer:
Plateau at vein 1950 meters
Adit 2 at 1875 meters
So at about 75 meters. The update doesn’t address the question on whether those high numbers occur at higher elevation or not…as they have only been assayed in the adits and at the very surface that has been oxidized/leached.
Sorry to hear that Lean…I do not see this stock moving north of .02 for quite awhile. Unfortunately, more patience will be required to realize a profit…
Mike, when can we expect more news or do U know?
Outcrop Merlin 1 Vein 7.25 Au g/t
Sounds like surface to me
Any time in the next few days…as soon as documents confirmed as filed with gov’t in Chile.
1 Like
Is this new,
It is new I guess if you didn’t read the previous 39 posts.
Yes, this surface sample was mentioned in the Jan 6 Update:
http://aurynmining.com/discovery-of-bonanza-gold-grades-at-caren-mine-within-the-altos-de-lipangue-project-2/
On another note, the very high grades in today’s Update are quite narrow if you note in the “size” column. This agrees with the Fortuna historical data.
2 Likes
Why would AURYN issue shares for various option agreements? Isn’t equity percentage interest quite different from dilutable shares? MDMN (and shareholders) should be quite happy with the 15% equity interest presently held in AURYN with the eventual exercise of the terms of the option agreements or a TO. With any new early production agreements I would think hard cash would result. These agreements would likely be totally separate depending on the make-up of the ownership, and in addition to the existing option agreement contracts for 100% claim ownership. I would expect AURYN to be the main beneficiary early on, especially on their newly acquired properties, of any early exploitation. Phase 2 drilling on the Merlin-Fortuna is scheduled to begin this quarter according to the timeline in AURYN’s project stack. Will there also be some early production (bulk sampling) pursued? AURYN states one of it’s goals is to prioritize the best exploitation targets. Despite this goal, AURYN is a private Company and reserves the right to disseminate information to the public at its own discretion. If the veins are on MDMN property there may be some benefit to MDMN shareholders much earlier than on the Fortuna, even though the Fortuna appears more favorable for early production. Unfortunately for Cerro shareholders, the early production equation does not work out until there is a resolution to the Quijano’s ownership problem. Not resolving the Quijano ownership interests is prolonging the PPS distress in both stocks. AURYN will work around this roadblock if it is not resolved up until the July 31, 2017 termination date, or just exercise an early option and TO for the 15% if there is no other resolution possible.
1 Like
@mdmnholder or @cornhuskergold – give me a wag for the production cost per tonne given what you see so far.
1 Like
The high grade veins appear very shallow. Note per Auryn the deepest Cerro ever went was 100 meters and they mined on 3 levels above that.
“The Fortuna de Lampa mine was developed on a system of relatively narrow, high grade gold-bearing quartz veins hosted in granodiorite. The veins trend approximately north-south and dip moderately to the east. The system can be traced over a length of approximately 800 meters and there is evidence of an associated breccia to the south. There are about 1,100 meters of underground workings that have been developed on four levels concentrate on the main Fortuna vein and reaching a depth of 100 meters. Records for small scale production in the 1940´s and 1950´s gave an average grade of 59 g/t gold and 104.1 g/t silver.” Fortuna de Lampa Mine - Agreement Signed with S.C.M. Cerro Dorado Chile - AURYN Mining Chile
2 Likes
On the other hand: you can see from the Auryn diagram that the “erosion level” is about 40m to 50m lower at Fortuna than it is at Merlin1, meaning approx. 50m more overburden. Their diagram matches pretty closely the spacing on the north side of the mountain. Adit #2 looks to be a little more than 100m below the plateau top on the north side. Adit #1, maybe 70m. The grades change in between there somewhere. And this matches up with Auryn’s diagram and the “erosion level” differences
1 Like
There are so many unknowns … I also agree with the idea that there will be a series of approaches. They are not going to just treat 2 g/t to 7 g/t rock as “overburden” and throw it over the cliff. Do they process that now and that is the first production? Or do they pile it up and process it several years from now when they could do that locally? Do they go after the highest grade stuff first via the north side of the mountain or do they really construct a 100m deep pit? All unknowns.
You have to consider that anything that takes time to construct, say 12 months, starts to take it out of the timeframe of the Option. So only what they can do in the next 17 months matters to the pre-Option period (and any other TO / reverse merger options etc. just make it more complicated)
I will say that I know of a fairly shallow open pit about to be constructed in Canada that claims $600 / oz production cost. Deeper more complicated mines are finally getting under $1000 for all-in costs. I think the safest approach is to use a range - calculate with $600 and then with $850 and that will give you bookends, IMO.
2 Likes
Is over burden removal cost still in a very low per ton range? http://costs.infomine.com/costdatacenter/miningcostmodel.aspx
What is the normal comparison of open pit to underground costs. Some geologist types here may have models that would help. https://www.coursehero.com/file/p1a122i/23-Underground-vs-Open-Pit-Compare-total-mining-cost-per-ton-of-ore-for-each/
What is the g/t for the open pit you reference in Canada?
I misremembered. It is $730 AISC.
It’s a decent sized open pit, not particularly shallow.
About 0.80 gpt.
But they can run 29,000 tpd. Pretty decent production.
not a particularly great model for the ADL
1 Like